Re: Gear Grinding 9: I Need a Wine!
Cool story.
Actually, I haven't even asked my employees whether they like the new system or not, so I don't know if they'd lie to me. All I know is that the reason we made the switch is that I thought the whole idea of someone calling in sick, then going through the embarrassment of being seen that day in the grocery store, was a charade, so we asked them before we made the change whether they would prefer a PTO method, or the old way, and to a person they said PTO. And, they've never come to me and asked to go back to the old way.
Right, because your employees share their true opinions with you. Another universal law of nature: They don't. People generally don't bite the hand that feeds them. Plus you've never given them the opportunity for unlimited sick time. You haven't offered them a true choice. You have dictated policy between two mediocre or bad choices. I've worked in four systems: No sick time, allotted sick time + allotted vacation, PTO, and effectively unlimited sick time + allotted vacation. My previous company converted from sick+vacation to PTO. It sucked. I didn't tell them I hated that idea because it was a small company and I had a job. I'm sure people told them, including me, that they liked the increased flexibility because in theory, it is better. But when it comes down to deciding whether I should come in sick and potentially infect other people, I decided that was the company's cost, not mine. Do I eat my vacation or go in sick? I will go in sick 100% of the time.
PTO might be favored by both parties in the right circumstances: Young, healthy workforce; fewer infants at home; low-paying jobs where vacations are an unobtainable luxury. My coworkers love the unlimited sick time here because they don't have to decide whether they come in sick or have to figure out how to care for a sick child and use vacation time instead. There is no deciding.
My current employer offers effectively unlimited sick time. You would think an employer as large as mine couldn't afford all these people gaming the system. You would think that it would scale accordingly and would still cost them the same percentage of employee-days if the system is gamed. The giant corporation understands that PTO is ultimately a bad deal for the employer. It encourages lower productivity employees to come in, potentially prolonging their illness because they aren't focused on their health while also possibly infecting other employees, further decreasing productivity. Why would a corporation offer such a giant honeypot if it's easily and often abused? Because it saves the company money and improves overall health and productivity. Plus, with unlimited sick time, there is no incentive to use it or lose it. It's not viewed as accrued benefits. It's just a benefit.
I have yet to ever come across a person who called in sick and faked it. Does it happen? I guarantee it does, just not at the rate you think. Then again, the average conservative also thinks drug testing welfare recipients is a good policy. So I guess that makes sense.
Edit: On the other hand, giant corporations are supremely efficient at ****ing their employees over the table without them knowing, so maybe I'm just getting screwed and I have no idea. Also likely.
Cool story.
Actually, I haven't even asked my employees whether they like the new system or not, so I don't know if they'd lie to me. All I know is that the reason we made the switch is that I thought the whole idea of someone calling in sick, then going through the embarrassment of being seen that day in the grocery store, was a charade, so we asked them before we made the change whether they would prefer a PTO method, or the old way, and to a person they said PTO. And, they've never come to me and asked to go back to the old way.